This episode revisits the Supreme Court's 2020 Bostock decision and examines how the Court's recent retreat from Bostock in United States v. Skrmetti sets up a constitutional showdown over transgender rights in school sports.

We analyze the methodical legal reasoning behind Bostock's landmark ruling that Title VII protects gay and transgender employees, then explore how each faction of justices treated Bostock differently in Skrmetti's constitutional challenge to Tennessee's transgender healthcare ban.

The episode concludes by examining how both sides strategically deployed Bostock and anticipated Skrmetti's outcome in their cert petitions for the upcoming transgender sports cases, revealing fundamental disagreements about statutory interpretation, constitutional methodology, and the scope of civil rights protections.

Cases Covered:

• Bostock v. Clayton County | Case No. 17-1618, 17-1623, 18-107 | Opinion: Here
• United States v. Skrmetti | Case No. 23-477 | Opinion: Here
• State of West Virginia v. B.P.J. | Case No. 24-735 | Docket Link: Here
• Little v. Hecox (Idaho) | Case No. 24-38 | Docket Link: Here
• West Virginia v. B.P.J. | Case No. 24-43 | Docket Link: Here

Episodes Referenced:

• August 5th Roundup: Presidential Power Crushes Agency Independence, Court Places Voting Rights Act in Crosshairs and Maryland v. Shatzer, a Case That Evolved Beyond Its Origins | Link: Here
• July 7th Roundup: New Certs: Transgender Rights in Schools and Religious Liberties | Link: Here
• Opinion Summary: United States v. Skrmetti | Date Decided: 6/18/25 | Case No. 23-477 | Link: Here
• Oral Argument: United States v. Skrmetti | Case No. 23-477 | Date Argued: 12/4/24 | Link: Here